valeriozappa

@ jdv666: I admit I'm not a metal lover; I'm definitely missing out on something musically and one day I'll dive deeper into it, but I have my sixsixsixist ideologies, I'm not sure if I'm explaining myself. ;)

for pretazzo: there’s another band I intend to review, it’s AUDIENCE, with THE HOUSE ON THE HILL. This band is quite similar to Colosseum: brass section, pretty jazzy, perhaps closer to prog, but not by much. I should divide prog into groups like COLOSSEUM, KING CRIMSON, AUDIENCE on one side, and YES, GENESIS, early PINK FLOYD (even though "the Piper" isn’t exactly prog, but psychedelic) etc. on the other. yes, I know, I’m vague, I know…

for donnie darko: beautiful! ;)
for the italian people: do I really have to say it? pop-rock dictionary 2006, enzo gentile & alberto tonti (sometimes I agree, sometimes I don’t)
for thejargonking: yes, it’s a bit vague as a statement. but I certainly didn’t mean to imply I don’t appreciate the progressive genre (as I understand it, and maybe one day I’ll attempt to explain my vision) which I love a lot. And to be honest, I’m not even a big fan of Jazz. I like experimentation, not standalone genres. Still too vague, huh? You’re right. I should really get down to writing out my definition of progressive.
for FOSCA: I didn't have gray hair at the time! ahahah! just kidding, I needed a spark to get back on track, I hope you'll like it!
for macaco: olè! ;)
for massyboy: you wouldn’t believe I really had no idea if it had been reviewed or not!
for wiserson: unfortunately, it’s typical when flipping through various dictionaries. let’s say it was a pretext!
for jdv666: I share your opinion, it’s obvious these critics are "human." But maybe they should listen to the albums a bit more, mainly for professional ethics. by the way, nice nickname of yours. especially the "little number."

Anyway, I can recommend you to some sci-fi novel publishers. As for nonsense, you shoot quite a bit, you have a great imagination! And you’re really funny, truly! Nice review on Velvet, and also the one on Atom Heart Mother! I’d like to meet you in person! Ha ha! "Marco Poletti dixit," nice signature! You're a real joker! Ha ha! You're great, kid! You’ll go far! I would, however, add "nonsense" at the end of your signature, oh... it’s just a humble advice....... ha ha! Bye, (but you need to trumpet a bit more, huh? And study more because you’re smart but you don't apply yourself, you rascal!)

nonsense.

WILD HONEY BY THE BEATLES???!?!????!???!??!???!!!!??? IF ANYTHING, THAT'S WILD HONEY PIE, BUT WHAT ON EARTH ARE YOU DOING COMMENTING WHEN YOU DON'T KNOW THINGS?.... damn it, guys, wake up, huh? I'm not surprised you like this album. holy shit....

It’s been a while since I wrote one. I think I really need to commit to it. Alright, now I’ll read a bit, but don’t bother too much, okay? :) Bye!

But look, I apologized first because I reacted impulsively, so there's no problem. Anyway, I really find Gilmour's latest album excellent. Sure, it can be a bit monotone in the arrangement at times, but that's just a tiny off note. Overall (especially the title track), it's an outstanding album. Who's going to be the first to write the review? ;)

Yes, and I find it excellent! If it was a provocation, you're barking up the wrong tree. I repeat, relax, don't do it.
(ps: I really find the album "On an Island" excellent. ps2: don't think of me as tense, since it all started from your not-so-relaxed comment. Don't twist things, I understand that your argument is a bit burnt but don't turn it around.)

And everyone knows that this album sucks, even Pink Floyd themselves. If you informed yourself a bit more...